No, but I do remember when Layton wanted the Federal government to spend 2.88 billion dollars on something which is in strictly provincial jurisdiction under section 92(7) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

you sound smart. so why didn't you mention how layton could have achieved this by earmarking transfer payments.

As a society we choose what our priorities are. I don't see how overspending $10-15B on war planes, on a no-other-bid process helps us out in the long run. Especially from a government that rallies around fiscal conservatism,and responsible governance, but does the opposite.

Their message isn't backed up by action. it exposes a culture of lies. They are almost worse than the Martin-Liberals.

I'm not saying that I agree with the F-35 purchase. But that's a completely separate issue from whether the federal government should be directly meddling in matters of provincial jurisdiction.

And yes, the federal government could earmark transfer payments, but that doesn't mean that they should end-run around the constitution like that. For one thing, federal meddling gives the provinces someone to blame rather than taking responsibility themselves for things which they are responsible for.

This doesn't seem like a very accurate headline. Reading the article (I know, what was I thinking?), it sounds like it's less a matter of him saying that he needs to fly first class and more a matter of his security detail deciding that he needs to fly first class.

I'm sure most of the regulars here don't need to be reminded of this, but over the past month I've found that about half of my comments get downvoted to zero within an hour. Since this seems to be happening more often than it used to, I thought there might be some new people here who could use a friendly reminder...

EDIT: And it took 4 minutes for both the post and this comment to be downvoted. Thank you for making my point, whoever you are.

Seems to me that Wynne is the bully here. The employers are going to extraordinary lengths to find a way for keeping those workers employed to remain profitable; would Wynne be happier if they had simply said "sorry, the government made your employment contract illegal; I guess you're out of a job"?

Statistics Canada writes at length about how owner-occupied accommodation is handled

Yes, it's basically ignored because it's considered an investment.

I'm not sure that's a valid reason to exclude it from inflation calculations.

Housing is seen as an asset, a durable good which provides positive economic value over an extended period of time, so house prices are not directly included in the CPI... Housing is seen as an asset, a durable good which provides positive economic value over an extended period of time, so house prices are not directly included in the CPI... the treatment of owned accommodation is one of the most debatable issues surrounding the construction of CPIs around the world.

They indirectly measure the cost of housing by calculating the "cost of using a house". I'm not convinced that's a valid measure. The cost of using a house might be almost the same today as it was several years ago, but the cost of buying that same house has gone up extraordinary amounts. Even just considering last year in Toronto: Houses have gone up by ~30%, but the "cost of using that house" has gone up by what...? Only 2%?

You can't tell me that the 2% change is more important and relevant than the 30% change!

They try to separate the investment portion of a house from the consumption portion... but when I go to buy a house, I still have to pay the full price. That's the number that's relevant to me.

A system where house prices can go up by 30% but not affect the inflation calculation, is a bit... well... bullshit.

You've flipped what I actually wrote. Neither I nor the researchers noted that men are "prone to sexual predation." Rather, women are often seen as too submissive, meek, or weak to be perpetrators.

Sexism against men is certainly an issue worth discussing with regards to this topic, but what I noted was specifically misogyny. It's just misogyny that also harms men (which I would argue is actually quite common).

The intent seems to be to bully judges into rendering politically correct decisions, rather than relying on their knowledge of the law to pass legally correct decisions.

In the trial which sparked this latest outrage, the only evidence presented concerning consent was an expert witness brought by the crown, who testified that the complaint might have been able to consent. With no evidence that the complainant either didn't consent or was unable to consent, the judge had no option but to find the accused not guilty.

EDIT: Remember guys, downvoting isn't allowed in /r/CanadaPolitics. In two hours I've seen this comment's score go from 1 down to -1 up to 8 and back down to 0.

You can do whatever you want. However, you and I clearly have different values if you think that opening our parks to extraction and "research" isn't scary.

From the link:

"feasibility study" means a study of the feasibility, including, without limitation, the feasibility of the location, design, construction, use, maintenance, improvement or deactivation, of one or more of the following:

(a) a road or highway;
(b) a pipeline;
(c) a transmission line;
(d) a telecommunications project;
(e) a prescribed project or a project in a prescribed class of projects;
(f) a structure, improvement or work related to a project described in any of paragraphs (a) to (e);

Keep these things the fuck out of our parks. I don't want pipelines cutting through forests or telecommunications towers topping the summits of mountains.

A feasibility study is exactly that: A study to see if doing something would be feasible. It is not approval to actually go ahead and do said thing.

I think the usual way these things work is that a company would say "you know, it would be really really great if we could use this corner of the park... how about you take that bit out of the park and we give you this other bigger chunk of land which you can add back in to replace it". We end up with more park land out of such deals; so what's the harm?

Remember folks, the RCMP are just doing their job and enforcing the law. The protesters aren't evil either, they are standing up for their beliefs. Here's hoping there is no violence and that it's all resolved peacefully.

The protesters aren't evil either, they are standing up for their beliefs.

There are plenty of ways of standing up for your beliefs without breaking the law, however. I support the right of the protesters to state their views; but they have no right to place themselves above the law.

Canadian law allows for the military to be deployed to respond to emergencies. They were deployed, when there was an emergency.

The Quebec government is now saying "hey, can you leave the troops here to serve as free unskilled labourers", and the federal government is quite right in saying that no, that isn't the military's job, and that if the Quebec government needs unskilled labour, it should hire unskilled labourers.

American style mudslinging attack ads have no place in Canadian politics.

American-style mudslinging attack ads are about inventing things or taking them wildly out of context. Pointing out that Adrian Dix forged documents in an attempt to obstruct a police investigation is neither of those.

So why did you choose as a source a site that is plainly bigoted? It’s not simply ‘nutty’. It’s sexist, and you link to that very site. This does not look good. How would you expect Spanish people to react if the site was anti-Spanish? Why would men be expected to respond differently?

And the choice of this site as a source? Have you read their stuff? Toxic masculinity is a thing. Toxic femininity can’t exist, for reasons. Although mothers are statistically more likely to abuse their children than fathers are, this is because of patriarchy.

Given the political shit storms that surround feminism, both pro and con, why did you choose this as a source for inspiration? It’s difficult to not see this as a decision owing more to politics than a desire to have a civil and productive community.

I'm not a big fan of that site, for exactly the reasons you mention. But they had a nice long list of "shitty things people have done in other projects" so when we wanted to give examples of stuff we didn't want to see I'm the FreeBSD project, it was a convenient place to start.

This shit also doesn't do anything to reduce traffic congestion. It's not going to push people to use transit because the people that CAN use transit already are. Transit is ALSO congested during peak times so what are they going to do, add tolls to all the bridges and then jack up the price of transit just to milk the middle and lower class in the lower mainland even more.

I'm so fucking done with this shit city. I've already got plans to move to the interior in the Spring. Between this shit, the housing market, the influx of foreign UNTESTED drivers(3 of whom have hit me in the last year, destroying the value of my only asset) and the rain, I'm fucking done.

I've never heard of a more badly named policy than "right to work". It sounds good if you don't know what it is, but then you learn that essentially it means employees have fewer rights than in other regions, and it doesn't sound so good anymore.

I agree that unions can stifle things from time to time, but so can management, and overall unions have won some pretty incredible benefits for the middle class and remain one of the few kinds of organizations that could help defend those benefits if push comes to shove.

Weakening unions does not have to lead to a decrease in salaries and benefits to the middle class worker, but it probably will, especially if new jobs would be created that couldn't be created in a union context.

Head down to Main & Hastings and start protesting against gentrification. If you make enough noise, all the homeless people will get the message that the downtown east side is where they belong, and they'll stop bothering you by showing up in other parts of the city.

Until the Crown corporation locked out workers June 14, many Canadians might not even have noticed there was a strike as CUPW staged rotating walkouts across the country.

Canadians didn't notice that there was a strike? I guess it was a complete coincidence that mail volumes dropped by 50%; nothing to do with Canadians not wanting to have their mail get stuck if strike action escalated.